Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

3 new countries approved the Treaty

Options
  • 12-06-2008 3:08pm
    #1
    WooPeeA
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,136 ✭✭✭


    Yesterday and today 3 new countries has approved Treaty of Lisbon! Estonia, Finland and Greece.. We're still waiting for Cyprus, Czech Rep, Italy, Spain and Ireland of course..


«1

Comments

  • Options
    #2
    ShooterSF
    Registered Users Posts: 8,824 ✭✭✭ShooterSF


    Hurrah for them. Completely irrelevant to us though..... And irrelevant completely if any of the nations remaining decide against it.


  • Options
    #3
    turgon
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,762 ✭✭✭turgon


    Yes. And even though it was only their parliaments, some Irish people are still of the opinion that this means that the whole country agrees with it.
    Call Me Jimmy wrote: »
    No our vote is "for Irish", we are voting whether we want to accept an EU treaty, you have already accepted it.


  • Options
    #4
    WooPeeA
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,136 ✭✭✭WooPeeA


    turgon wrote: »
    Yes. And even though it was only their parliaments, some Irish people are still of the opinion that this means that the whole country agrees with it.
    Parliaments are elected by people to represents them inside and outside of the country. I haven't seen lots of protests in Europe..


  • Options
    #5
    Rb
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,277 ✭✭✭✭Rb


    WooPeeA wrote: »
    Parliaments are elected by people to represents them inside and outside of the country. I haven't seen lots of protests in Europe..
    In the last General Election, did you make your decision with the Lisbon Treaty in mind? There was little or no mention of it back then, so why would you have?


  • Options
    #6
    WooPeeA
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,136 ✭✭✭WooPeeA


    Rb wrote: »
    In the last General Election, did you make your decision with the Lisbon Treaty in mind? There was little or no mention of it back then, so why would you have?
    No I haven't, but I voted for people which I support, and those people, just like me supports Treaty of Lisbon. So no problem at all on my side.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    Rb
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,277 ✭✭✭✭Rb


    WooPeeA wrote: »
    No I haven't, but I voted for people which I support, and those people, just like me supports Treaty of Lisbon. So no problem at all on my side.
    So say you didn't support the treaty, would you still be happy to let those you voted for make the decision for you?


  • Options
    #8
    WooPeeA
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,136 ✭✭✭WooPeeA


    Rb wrote: »
    So say you didn't support the treaty, would you still be happy to let those you voted for make the decision for you?
    No, I wouldn't be happy, but I would accept it as the government represents majority of people. If I would be against, I wouldn't vote for pro-European party.


  • Options
    #9
    Rb
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,277 ✭✭✭✭Rb


    WooPeeA wrote: »
    No, I wouldn't be happy, but I would accept it as the government represents majority of people. If I would be against, I wouldn't vote for pro-European party.
    And is that what you're doing with the Lisbon treaty? I.e just doing what your government is telling you to?


  • Options
    #10
    Call Me Jimmy
    Registered Users Posts: 8,449 ✭✭✭Call Me Jimmy


    turgon wrote: »
    Yes. And even though it was only their parliaments, some Irish people are still of the opinion that this means that the whole country agrees with it.

    Agreeing with something and accepting it are different things imo.

    I don't appreciate the inter-thread quoting, especially when you mis-use a quote of mine to make a point.


  • Options
    #11
    ShooterSF
    Registered Users Posts: 8,824 ✭✭✭ShooterSF


    WooPeeA wrote: »
    No, I wouldn't be happy, but I would accept it as the government represents majority of people. If I would be against, I wouldn't vote for pro-European party.

    Sorry but that's bordering on chick logic! (If there's any ladies here i do apologise :) ) So you'd be against it but accept it because the government represents the majority of the people. But wait what's to say others who support them aren't against the treaty if you are (you're not claiming to be unique are you) and therefore what's to say that those against then aren't actually the majority? But then again how could we figure that out? Oh wait....


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,791 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    turgon wrote: »
    Yes. And even though it was only their parliaments, some Irish people are still of the opinion that this means that the whole country agrees with it.
    The whole country - any country - will never agree with anything.

    The nature of the EU is that all of its members have to agree on a treaty in order for it to be ratified. Its members are the countries of which it consists, not its citizens.

    Each member country must ratify the treaty by passing legislation saying "we ratify this treaty". Passing legislation is the function of parliaments.

    Ireland is no different. In order to ratify the treaty, our parliament must pass legislation. What's unusual about us is that our constitution has been interpreted as meaning the parliament can't pass such legislation. As such, the constitution must be amended each time treaty ratification legislation is introduced.


  • Options
    #13
    turgon
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,762 ✭✭✭turgon


    WooPeeA wrote: »
    No I haven't, but I voted for people which I support, and those people, just like me supports Treaty of Lisbon. So no problem at all on my side.

    So the people you vote for agree with everything you think?? That is not very common I would imagine, but I am happy that your thoughts are mirrored in parliament.
    Agreeing with something and accepting it are different things imo.

    Really??


  • Options
    #14
    turgon
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,762 ✭✭✭turgon


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    Each member country must ratify the treaty by passing legislation saying "we ratify this treaty". Passing legislation is the function of parliaments.

    I am very aware of these facts. What I am saying is that because this piece of legislation is a bit more important than the usual - it will change the way people are governed ("reform" treaty) - that the country should be able to voice their opinions. Now I know you will say that they are not "legally obliged", but sometimes you have to hold up the principles of democracy without having to be forced to by laws.


  • Options
    #15
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,791 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    turgon wrote: »
    Really??
    Of course. Have you never accepted anything you disagree with?


  • Options
    #16
    Call Me Jimmy
    Registered Users Posts: 8,449 ✭✭✭Call Me Jimmy


    turgon wrote: »


    Really??

    Completely! Are you serious?


  • Options
    #17
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,791 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    turgon wrote: »
    What I am saying is that because this piece of legislation is a bit more important than the usual - it will change the way people are governed ("reform" treaty) - that the country should be able to voice their opinions.
    In what respect is this treaty different from the Nice, Maastricht, and Amsterdam treaties, that you think it should be ratified differently?


  • Options
    #18
    BMH
    Closed Accounts Posts: 804 ✭✭✭BMH


    turgon wrote: »
    What I am saying is that because this piece of legislation is a bit more important than the usual
    How so? I can think of plenty of things the Dáil decided on this year that were far more important.


  • Options
    #19
    turgon
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,762 ✭✭✭turgon


    Well I have had a few girls break up with me!! But in that situation I didn't have a choice. Here they do. I am understanding "accepting" as something I have actually endorsed (accepting an award)), not something I merely went along with (it is raining today).

    BMH, elaborate.


  • Options
    #20
    PrivateEye
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,283 ✭✭✭PrivateEye


    3 parliments.

    I'm a FF man, and I voted no today.

    It is unjust to not give people a referendum on the matter, for fear they'll go and vote 'the wrong way'.

    For the 450 Million with no vote-vote no.


  • Options
    #21
    Call Me Jimmy
    Registered Users Posts: 8,449 ✭✭✭Call Me Jimmy


    turgon wrote: »
    Well I have had a few girls break up with me!! But in that situation I didn't have a choice. Here they do. I am understanding "accepting" as something I have actually endorsed (accepting an award)), not something I merely went along with (it is raining today).

    Are you saying you haven't accepted the fact that those girls have broken up with you? When they broke up with you, did you beat them up and force them to stay with you, or did you basically say, "I don't agree but I respect the fact that you don't want to be with me anymore"?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #22
    ShooterSF
    Registered Users Posts: 8,824 ✭✭✭ShooterSF


    Call Me Jimmy wrote: »
    Are you saying you haven't accepted the fact that those girls have broken up with you? When they broke up with you, did you beat them up and force them to stay with you, or did you basically say, "I don't agree but I respect the fact that you don't want to be with me anymore"?

    I think you mis-read that one I think he said in spite but even so...
    To test your point in the situation you outline there he would neither have accepted the broke up with or agreed that they had broke up with him.

    Now though if he has moved on he has accepted it (I hope :D ) and if you asked him had they broke up with him I'm sure he'd agree with you....


  • Options
    #23
    Call Me Jimmy
    Registered Users Posts: 8,449 ✭✭✭Call Me Jimmy


    Look I'm sorry there's no debate here, accepting something is different from agreeing. Acceptance of something does not imply that you agree with it. I brought it up because of his use of my quote but it went on for longer than I thought.


  • Options
    #24
    turgon
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,762 ✭✭✭turgon


    Call Me Jimmy wrote: »
    Are you saying you haven't accepted the fact that those girls have broken up with you? When they broke up with you, did you beat them up and force them to stay with you, or did you basically say, "I don't agree but I respect the fact that you don't want to be with me anymore"?

    Yes I did accept it, but that was because I hadnt a choice. Which is exactly what I said in the previous post. There are two definitions of accept in this context.
    1. To answer affirmatively: accept an invitation. In this situation accepting would be to endorse: ie if the majority of the people voted Yes.
    2. To endure resignedly. This would be the case of ratification in UK.


  • Options
    #25
    Call Me Jimmy
    Registered Users Posts: 8,449 ✭✭✭Call Me Jimmy


    turgon wrote: »
    Yes. And even though it was only their parliaments, some Irish people are still of the opinion that this means that the whole country agrees with it.
    me wrote:
    No our vote is "for Irish", we are voting whether we want to accept an EU treaty, you have already accepted it.

    Ok so where did I say that the whole country agrees with it. You are going to argue that that guy hasn't accepted it?

    1. To answer affirmatively: accept an invitation. In this situation accepting would be to endorse: ie if the majority of the people voted Yes.
    2. To endure resignedly. ie if the minority of people voted No, this is them.

    So both groups of people accept. Also, the guy whos elected government ratifies the treaty without a referendum also falls into the second category. Which is what I said and you seemed to try to twist (or simply misunderstood).


  • Options
    #26
    WooPeeA
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,136 ✭✭✭WooPeeA


    Rb wrote: »
    And is that what you're doing with the Lisbon treaty? I.e just doing what your government is telling you to?
    No, I would just accept the wish of majority even though I do not agree with that. That's the democracy..
    turgon wrote: »
    So the people you vote for agree with everything you think?? That is not very common I would imagine, but I am happy that your thoughts are mirrored in parliament.
    Not everything but let's say, 60-70% of issues..
    ShooterSF wrote: »
    Sorry but that's bordering on chick logic! (If there's any ladies here i do apologise :) ) So you'd be against it but accept it because the government represents the majority of the people. But wait what's to say others who support them aren't against the treaty if you are (you're not claiming to be unique are you) and therefore what's to say that those against then aren't actually the majority? But then again how could we figure that out? Oh wait....
    Well, first of all I think people should be aware of power of their voice and vote carefully and wisely. People shouldn't give a damn on it and do not ignore it. Otherwise, the minority will take the power over the country.

    All Europeans live in great democratic republics. People are choosing candidates who will represents them inside and outside the country for a couple of years. We must accept all good and bad things about it. That's why the majority of people will always have more to say.

    What about minority of people? Well, Winston Churchill perfectly described my point of view one day saying "Democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried". ;)

    The minority can try to instigate people into their side using good arguments. No other form of gov allows that.. I think all they can do is respect the others and accept their choice. That's the democracy.


  • Options
    #27
    ShooterSF
    Registered Users Posts: 8,824 ✭✭✭ShooterSF


    WooPeeA wrote: »
    No, I would just accept the wish of majority even though I do not agree with that. That's the democracy..


    Not everything but let's say, 60-70% of issues..


    Well, first of all I think people should be aware of power of their voice and vote carefully and wisely. People shouldn't give a damn on it and do not ignore it. Otherwise, the minority will take the power over the country.

    All Europeans live in great democratic republics. People are choosing candidates who will represents them inside and outside the country for a couple of years. We must accept all good and bad things about it. That's why the majority of people will always have more to say.

    What about minority of people? Well, Winston Churchill perfectly described my point of view one day saying "Democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried". ;)

    The minority can try to instigate people into their side using good arguments. No other form of gov allows that.. I think all they can do is respect the others and accept their choice. That's the democracy.

    Yes but luckily for us we have a constitution which is above the elected government and if they want to change any part they must ask our permission. Which is completely different to being elected to run the country on a day to day basis!


  • Options
    #28
    WooPeeA
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,136 ✭✭✭WooPeeA


    ShooterSF wrote: »
    Yes but luckily for us we have a constitution which is above the elected government and if they want to change any part they must ask our permission. Which is completely different to being elected to run the country on a day to day basis!
    Yes, there are many kinds of democracy. The bad thing with referendum might be the fact that most of not decided people votes "No", even though they don't know is it really bad for them.


  • Options
    #29
    sink
    Registered Users Posts: 4,314 ✭✭✭sink


    ShooterSF wrote: »
    Yes but luckily for us we have a constitution which is above the elected government and if they want to change any part they must ask our permission. Which is completely different to being elected to run the country on a day to day basis!

    You should read up on the history of Germany before WWII particularly on the rise of the Third Reich and you will see why a lot of countries in Europe won't ever hold referenda.


  • Options
    #30
    ShooterSF
    Registered Users Posts: 8,824 ✭✭✭ShooterSF


    WooPeeA wrote: »
    Yes, there are many kinds of democracy. The bad thing with referendum might be the fact that most of not decided people votes "No", even though they don't know is it really bad for them.

    The first part is true they should have at least decided why they are voting no, I have my issues. The second part my friend, is simply your opinion don't state it as fact please.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #31
    WooPeeA
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,136 ✭✭✭WooPeeA


    ShooterSF wrote: »
    The first part is true they should have at least decided why they are voting no, I have my issues. The second part my friend, is simply your opinion don't state it as fact please.
    I know few people who told me that they will vote "no" just because they don't get the Treaty.


Advertisement